PDF Format - Our Harbour Front

- 8 -that different areas around the Harbour were subject todifferent considerations. He was of the view thatformulating an overall framework for the Harbourbefore working on any concrete project would renderthe whole review process cumbersome and lengthy.Instead, he considered that an integrated area approachshould be more appropriate. As the process evolved,Members could offer comments and include specificproject areas.4.5 Mr Raymond Wong said that a boundary was anabstract line and the transition between theharbourfront and the hinterland was gradual. Heconsidered that a study of the opportunities availableand the existing constraints should be the starting pointof the review. He added that at the request of aMember, a briefing on land uses and developments onboth sides of the Harbour would be given at theforthcoming HEC meeting.4.6 Mrs Mei Ng said that she had several concerns. First,she felt that the vision for the Harbour was toorestrictive. She suggested that a three-dimensionalapproach, taking into account building height, airspaceand underground areas, be adopted. Second, she feltthat transportation, utilities and tourism still weighedheavily in the principles. Third, there was no mentionof a management framework nor how the public was tobe involved. Lastly, she said that there should be lessartificiality and buildings along the waterfront.4.7 Mr Bernard Chan reminded that the legal framework,as a result of the court judgment handed down inrespect of reclamation works, should also beincorporated in the principles.4.8 The Chairman emphasised that the Sub-committeeshould aim for action. He proposed Dr Alvin Kwok,Dr Andrew Thomson and Planning Department toform a task group to work out the planning principles.Miss Daisy Lai said that HKIP also wished to join thetask group. The Secretary would arrange the meeting